On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 01:06:08PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 01:56:02PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 11:45:18AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > > > We were leaking a bit. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > lib/igt_core.c | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/igt_core.c b/lib/igt_core.c > > > index 7ac7ebe..364cdd0 100644 > > > --- a/lib/igt_core.c > > > +++ b/lib/igt_core.c > > > @@ -591,6 +591,8 @@ void __igt_skip_check(const char *file, const int line, > > > "Last errno: %i, %s\n" > > > "Test requirement: (%s)\n%s", > > > func, file, line, err, strerror(err), check, buf); > > > + > > > + free(buf); > > > > igt_skip is noreturn, i.e. this adds dead code. No idea how this fix this > > without causing a mess. > > > > /me summons the devil and wishes for a garbage collector > > Oh well, if it's no return it'll be freed for us anwyay. Will push the > other ones with the free removed in the last one. Well it does a longjump and will continue execution with the next subtest. It's only a process exit if this isn't a subtest igt binary. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
